The Ohio Democrat. (Logan, O. [Ohio]) 1886-1906, 1887-12-03
OHIO SWAMP LAND.
Tho Decision Of Land Commis.
eioner Conflrmed
In the Matter OF the Claim OF the state
of ohio for Indemnity swamp
Lands-Postuiaster General
RENTS Penalties.


He LETTER.
WASHINGTON, Nov. 25.--Acting Secretary
Muldrow, Of the Interior Department, yes.
terday affirmed decision OF the Commits.
sioner Of the General Land ONCE in the
matter OF the claim Of the State Of Ohio
for indemnity swamp land. The decision
of the Acting Secretary is In the form Of
letter to the Commissioner, and Is as fol-
lows:
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR,
WASHINGTON, Nov. %, 1887
Tho Commissioner of the General Land Onicc:
SrR-The claim OF the State OF Ohio 10 in.
demnity for certain land in the Defiance land
district, sold by the United States at 1880 per
1850, for the reason that the sumo was granted
to It rs swamp and overfiowed land by the act
mentioned, is before me on appeal by the duly
ONCE decisiSn Of June %, 1895, wherein you
hold, in reply to q letter by counsel dated June
10, 1885, calling your attention to said claim lar and
State of Ohio has no legal claim"
The land for which indemnityis is claimed ID IN
the alternate sections within the grant to the
State of Ohio for canal purposes by the oct OF
May a. 1928 a Stat 305) and which by the terms
OF said act were reserved to the United States.
! concur in your conclusion that the question
Secretary Of the Interior in his decision Of No
vember 90, 1885, refusing the claim OF the state
Of to the ssSt9R smarS
reserved. Counsel insist that these lands being
offered ut public sale in September, 1874. e.,
suSseauently subs az VII thereto, were not in q state Of
reservation at that date as was the fact in the
claim before Secretary. McClelland, supra.
then Secretary expressly says that the State has
no right under the act OF September sS 1880 to
any land which had been reserved by the Presi-
the special purpose Of that act, TO wit "The
reimbu,sements to the government 1or the
The act OF May "a, 1928, supra, making the
grant to Ohio for canal purposes. contained the
same reservation to the United States as does
the snme net Of September 20, 1850 (making the
grant to the Mobile & Chicago railroad), passed
upon by Secretary McClelland. Il Lester, 521O
That the obvious purposes of such reservation
made IN the canal grant to Ohio and In
ment for the grant" cannot, in my judgment. be
successfully controverted. This reservation
amounted TO disposal Of the land and. conse. 50.
by the swamp act Of 1880. Its subsequent sale
was but the accomplishment Of the legislative
pressed by Secretary McClelland, as aforesaid,
upon the similar state Of facts presented by the
claim Of the State Of Illinois. am Of the opin-
Nifty, no title having vested in the State, Your
decision is affirmed and the papers In the case
are herewith returned. Very respectfully,
H. L. MULDRow, Acting Secretary.
In response to an appeal, taken by q
prominent New York news company, from
the ruling of Postmaster Pearson at New
York exactiug the frst-class rate Of post
age on certain third and fourth-class mail
matter now held at the New York post
Office, the Postmaster General has replied
in substance that while he has no power to
authorize any modification of the law re-
garding permissible printing on wrappers
enclosing such matter, that statutes do
confer upon him the right to remit penal
ties in any case where the postal laws i'm
pose them. Holding that the extra charge
Of postage in this particular case falls into
the nature OF penalty, and it appearing
that no fraud was intended, but that on
the contrary purpose to comply with the
law is manifest, the penalty or additional
postage exacted, amounting to about 81, 900,
Is remitted. The Postoffice Department is
preparing circular letter, which will be
sent to all postmasters, authorizing them
to remit penalties in all simil ar cases, or
where the circumstances seem to require